Highway 401 Planning Study
from Cobourg to ColborneGWP 4060-00-00
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Township of Cramahe
August 20, 2020
Agenda
1. Study Overview
2. Consultation
3. Evaluation of Alternatives
4. Preferred Plan
5. Potential Detours
6. Notification Strategy
7. Project Schedule
8. Questions
Study Overview
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Study Area
Study Purpose
The purpose of the study is to identify a Recommended Plan that
addresses current and future transportation needs for Highway 401,
from 2 km east of Nagle Road to Percy Street (approximately 18 km)
This Highway 401 Planning Study includes:
• Replacement and/or rehabilitation of bridges and structural culverts
• Interchange modifications at Lyle Street and Percy Street
• Establishing the Highway 401 future footprint for interim 6-lanes and
ultimate 8-lanes
• Commuter parking lot expansions or relocations
The timing of construction is currently not known
Environmental Assessment Process
• This study is being carried out
under the requirements of the
Class Environmental Assessment
(EA) for Provincial Transportation
Facilities (2000)
• The study falls within the scope
of a Group “B" project, which
includes highway improvements
that provide/cause a significant
modification in traffic access
The following environmental investigations are being completed as part of this Class EA study:
• Cultural Heritage Assessment
• Terrestrial Environment Assessment
• Fisheries Assessment
• Sediment and Erosion Risk Assessment
• Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment
• Contamination Overview Study
• Groundwater Overview Assessment
• Landscape Composition Plan
• Noise Impact Assessment
• Air Quality Assessment
Existing Study Area:
• Situated within a rural portion of Northumberland County
• Highway 401 acts as a visual and physical divide between Lake Ontario and the Oak Ridges Moraine
• The surrounding landscape contains potential built heritage resources, including residences, farmsteads, barns and a
cemetery
• Areas having the potential for the recovery of archaeological resources are present
• Woodlands and Significant Wildlife Habitat for a number of species have been identified, including turtle wintering and
nesting areas, amphibian breeding habitat and animal movement corridors
• 15 potential watercourse crossings have been investigated, most of which provide fish habitat
• All water crossings involve cold water streams, and include both spring and fall spawning fish species
• Aquatic and terrestrial species at risk have been recorded in the study area
Existing Environment
Consultation
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Stakeholders
• Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks
• Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
• Ministry of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries
• Lower Trent Conservation Authority
• Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority
• Town of Cobourg
• Township of Hamilton
• Township of Alnwick/Haldimand
• Township of Cramahe
• Northumberland County
Consultation
Municipal Advisory Committee (MAC)
MAC Meeting 1 – May 16, 2019
• Study purpose and scope
• Environmental assessment process
• Consultation programs
• Preliminary alternatives
MAC Meeting 2 – April 15, 2020
• Preliminary Preferred Plan
• Potential construction detour routes
• Potential impacts and mitigation measures
Consultation
Indigenous Consultation
• Williams Treaties First Nations Claims Coordinator
• Beausoleil First Nation
• Chippewas of Georgina Island
• Chippewas of Rama First Nation (Mnjikaning)
• Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation
• Alderville First Nation
• Curve Lake First Nation
• Hiawatha First Nation
• Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte
• Métis Nation of Ontario
Consultation
Public Information Centre 1
Public Information Centre (PIC 1) was held on September
18, 2019 to present and gather feedback on:
• The project background and process being followed
• Existing study area conditions
• Bridge and structural culvert rehabilitation / replacement alternatives,
long list of interchange alternatives, and future Highway 401 footprints
for interim six and ultimate eight lane alternatives
Consultation
What did we hear?
• Potential impacts to property
• Potential increases in noise
• Potential impacts to fish/aquatic species
• Potential impacts to cultural heritage
landscapes/property
• Suggestions to improve drainage
• Suggestions for wildlife and snow barriers
• Suggestions to ensure that suitable detour
routes are provided during construction
Evaluation of Alternatives
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Evaluation of Lyle Street Interchange Alternatives
Factor/Criteria Diamond Parclo A4 Parclo A2
Highway Engineering
• Traffic Operations
• Geometrics & Safety
• Constructability
• Utilities
• Total Cost
• Lowest traffic capacity when compared to the
other alternatives
• Highest number of traffic conflict points(left-
turn movements) at ramps
• Does not provide any free-flow traffic
movements from the crossing road to the
ramps
• Requires four closely spaced intersections
within the interchange footprint
• Lowest construction costs ($13.2M)
• Highest/surplus traffic capacity when compared
to the other alternatives
• Lowest number of traffic conflict points (left-
turn movements) at ramps
• All (4) traffic movements from the crossing
road to the ramps are free-flow
• Direct ramps (N-W and S-E) conflict with
adjacent intersections
• Highest construction costs ($20.0M)
• Provides sufficient traffic capacity for the long-
term operation needs
• Can be expanded to Parclo A4 to increase
capacity if required in the future
• Fewer intersections (3) within the interchange
footprint
• Provides free-flow traffic movements for the
dominant movement (S-W)
• Lower construction cost ($16.4M) compared to
the Parclo A4 configuration
Social & Cultural Environment
• Property
• Air/Noise
• Cultural Heritage
• Archaeology
• Contamination
• Impacts smallest area of private property
• Impacts smallest area of land having
archeological potential
• Impacts greatest area of private property
• Impacts greatest area of land having
archaeological potential
• Impacts smaller area of private property when
compared to the Parclo A4 configuration
• Impacts smaller area of land having
archaeological potential when compared to the
Parclo A4 configuration
Natural Environment
• Terrestrial Ecosystem
• Species of Special Concern
• Fish & Fish Habitat
• Potential to impact greater area of wildlife
habitat and significant treed areas when
compared to the Parclo A2 configuration
• Potential to impact greatest area of wildlife
habitat and significant treed areas
• Potential to impact smallest area of wildlife
habitat and significant treed areas
Overall Summary
Most PreferredLeast Preferred
4
Evaluation of Percy Street Interchange Alternatives
Factor/Criteria Diamond Parclo A4 Parclo A2
Highway Engineering
• Traffic Operations
• Geometrics & Safety
• Constructability
• Utilities
• Total Cost
• Lowest traffic capacity when compared to the
other alternatives
• Highest number of traffic conflict points(left-
turn movements) at ramp terminals
• Does not provide any free-flow traffic
movements from the crossing road to the
ramps
• Lowest construction costs ($12.8M)
• Highest/surplus traffic capacity when compared
to the other alternatives
• Lowest number of traffic conflict points (left-
turn movements) at ramp terminals
• All (4) traffic movements from the crossing
road to the ramps are free-flow
• Highest construction costs ($20.4M)
• Provides sufficient capacity for the long-term
traffic operation needs
• Can be expanded to Parclo A4 to increase
capacity if required
• Provides free-flow traffic movements for the
dominant movement (S-W)
• Lower construction cost ($15.4M) compared to
a Parclo A4 configuration
Social & Cultural Environment
• Property
• Air/Noise
• Cultural Heritage
• Archaeology
• Contamination
• Impacts greater area of private property when
compared to the Parclo A2 configuration
• Impacts highest number of private properties
• Impacts greater area of land having
archaeological potential when compared to the
Parclo A2 configuration
• Impacts greatest area of private property
• Impacts higher number of private properties
when compared to the Parclo A2 configuration
• Impacts greatest area of land having
archaeological potential
• Impacts smallest area of private property
• Impacts fewer number of private properties
when compared to the Parclo A4 configuration
• Impacts smallest area of land having
archaeological potential
Natural Environment
• Terrestrial Ecosystem
• Species of Special Concern
• Fish & Fish Habitat
• Impacts smaller area of wildlife habitat when
compared to the Parclo A4 configuration
• Impacts smallest area of significant treed area
and potential bird Species at Risk habitat
• Impacts greatest area of wildlife habitat
• Impacts greater area of significant treed area
and potential bird Species at Risk habitat when
compared to the Diamond configuration
• Impacts smaller area of wildlife habitat when
compared to the Parclo A4 configuration
• Impacts smaller area of significant treed area
and potential bird Species at Risk habitat when
compared to the Parclo A4 configuration
Overall Summary
Most PreferredLeast Preferred
4
Evaluation of Highway 401 Cross-Section Alternatives
Two Highway 401 cross-section alternatives were presented at PIC 1 and subjected to further evaluation:
Widen to Outside
Highway 401 – 8 Lane Cross-
Section
Highway 401 – 8 Lane Cross-Section
Shift to Inside and Widen
Outside
Alternative 1 (Widen to Outside), is preferred because:• Construction to the outside only is simpler and less costly than widening inside and outside
• It minimizes traffic lane shifts during construction, which minimizes impacts to traffic flow and driver expectations
• The cross-section is consistent with the Highway 401 cross-section to west (i.e. previously widened to outside)
Evaluation of Alternatives
Evaluation Process
Identify Criteria
Evaluation Criteria are established through:
• public input
• similar projects
• provincial guidelines
• existing conditions
Weigh Criteria
Each criterion is assigned a weight factor
that best reflects its relative importance.
Evaluate Alternatives
The sum of the weighted scores provides a
total score for each alternative. This is the
basis for ranking the alternatives and, along
with a reasoned argument assessment
approach, helps to identify the
recommended plan
The highest scoring alternative
Evaluation Criteria (and Weighting)
The following criteria were used to evaluate Widening Alternatives and Short List of Interchange
Alternatives. Criteria were refined based on the input received at and following PIC 1, and used to identify
the preferred alternative:
Engineering (50%)
Traffic Operations• Consider projected future traffic
• Consider Level of Service
(LOS) on Highway 401
Geometrics & Safety• Consider design standards for
provincial highways and
interchanges
• Consider potential for collisions
on Highway 401
• Consider potential to
accommodate Long
Combination Vehicles
• Consider crossing road grades
at ramp terminals
Constructability • Consider construction
techniques
• Consider traffic flow and
operations, including local
access and out-of-way travel
Utilities• Consider impacts to utilities
Cost• Consider total cost including
utility relocations and property
acquisition
Community (30%)
Property• Consider impacts to private property
Noise & Air Quality• Consider proximity to residences
Built & Cultural Heritage• Consider potential to affect cultural
heritage resources
Archaeology• Consider impacts to areas of
archeological potential
Contamination• Consider potential to encounter
contaminated soils/groundwater
Environment (20%)
Terrestrial Ecosystem• Consider impacts on wildlife habitat
• Consider impacts on significant trees
or vegetation
Fish & Fish Habitat• Consider potential to impact
watercourses
Species of Conservation Concern• Consider impacts to Species-at-Risk
or habitat associated with Species-at-
Risk
Designated Areas• Consider impacts to Provincially
Significant Wetlands
Bridge Improvements Highway ImprovementsInterchange ImprovementsCulvert/Drainage Improvements
Preferred Plan
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Summary of Bridge ImprovementsPreferred Plan
Structure Interim Strategy Ultimate Strategy
Danforth Road Underpass Replace Rehabilitate
Gully Road Underpass Replace Rehabilitate
Lyle Street Underpass Replace Rehabilitate
Shelter Valley Road
(Culvert 21X-0273/CO)Rehabilitate Replace with bridge
Vernonville Road Overpass Rehabilitate and widen Replace
Boyce Road Overpass Rehabilitate and widen Replace
Percy Street Underpass Replace Rehabilitate
Preferred Plan Typical Highway 401 Underpass
Preferred Plan Typical Highway 401 Overpass
Summary of Culvert ImprovementsPreferred Plan
Structure Interim Strategy Ultimate Strategy
Culvert 21X-0467/CO Replace (trenchless) Rehabilitate
Culvert 21X-0468/CORehabilitate
Add retaining walls
Replace
(open cut)
Culvert 21X-0469/COReplace
(line and extend)Rehabilitate
Grafton Creek Culvert
21X-270/CO
Rehabilitate
Add retaining walls
Replace with
bridge
Northumberland Culvert
21X-470/COReplace (trenchless) Rehabilitate
Shelter Valley Creek Culvert
21X-272/CO
Rehabilitate
Add retaining walls
Replace with
bridge
Boyce’s Road Culvert
21X-0576/CO
Rehabilitate and
strengthen
Add retaining walls
Replace
(trenchless)
Summary of Highway Improvements
1. Lyle Street interchange and carpool lot improvements
2. Percy Street interchange and carpool lot improvements
3. Highway 401 vertical curve improvements (sags and crests)
4. Highway 401 horizontal curve improvements at Gully curves
5. Future widening of Highway 401 to six lanes (interim)
6. Future widening of Highway 401 to eight lanes (ultimate)
Preferred Plan
Typical Highway ImprovementsPreferred Plan
Lyle Street InterchangePreferred Plan
Lyle Street InterchangePreferred Plan
Percy Street InterchangePreferred Plan
Percy Street InterchangePreferred Plan
Highway 401 Future WideningPreferred Plan
Highway 401 Vertical Curve ImprovementsPreferred Plan
TYPICAL CREST CURVE IMPROVEMENT
TYPICAL SAG CURVE IMPROVEMENT
Ecopassage OpportunitiesPreferred Plan
Culvert IDExisting Culvert
Dimensions
Interim
Improvement
Ultimate
Improvement
Landscape
Feature
Opportunity for
Ecopassage
21X-0467/C0 3.1 m x 1.8 m box • Slip-line with new
culvert 2.7 m x 1.8
m
• Possible rehab • Wooded valley;
unnamed tributary 02
• Limited, due to
culvert size and
length
21X-0468/C0 3.1 m x 1.5 m box • Culvert
rehabilitation
• Culvert
replacement;
opportunity to
increase size
• Woodland and wetland,
primarily to south;
unnamed tributary 03
• Good, but not a key
landscape feature
21X-0469/C0 3.7 m x 1.8 m box • Culvert
replacement (line
and extend)
• Possible rehab • Wooded valley: Barnum
House Creek
• Limited, due to
culvert size and
length but adjacent
to large culvert/
future bridge
21X-0270/C0 9.8 m x 4.9 m arch • Culvert
rehabilitation and
retaining walls
• Replace with
bridge
• Wooded valley: Barnum
House Creek
• Excellent, existing
large diameter
culvert/future
bridge and follows
key landscape
feature
21X-0470/C0 3.1 m x 1.8 m box • Slip-line with new
culvert 2.7 m x 1.8
m
• Possible rehab • Wooded valley;
unnamed tributary 06
• Limited, due to
culvert size and
length
21X-0272/C0 15.2 m x 7.7 m arch • None • Replace with
bridge
• Wooded valley: Shelter
Valley Creek
• Excellent, existing
large diameter
culvert/future
bridge and follows
key landscape
feature
21X-0576/C0 3.1 m x 2.5 m box • Culvert
rehabilitation
• Culvert
replacement
• Wooded valley and
wetland, primarily to
north; unnamed tributary
09
• Limited, due to
culvert size and
length
Ecopassage OpportunitiesPreferred Plan
Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Measures
Environmental
FactorProposed Mitigation Measures/Commitments to Future Work
Fish and
Fish Habitat
Modifications to existing watercourse crossings have been identified. Impacts to watercourses will be
minimized to the extent possible. Opportunities to enhance fish habitat will be reviewed during detail design.
Trees/VegetationSome trees/vegetation will need to be removed as part of the Preferred Plan. Vegetation and tree removal will
be minimized to the extent possible.
Wildlife/Habitat
Potential wildlife passage locations have been identified and will be further assessed during detail design. MTO
will continue to engage MECP and MNRF in relation to wildlife passage.
Targeted species surveys will be carried out for species that have the potential to be present.
Cultural Heritage
Properties having cultural heritage value have been identified. Direct impacts to these properties are not
anticipated, although impacts will be confirmed during detail design. No construction activities will take place
until the Ministry of Sport, Heritage, Tourism and Culture Industries has confirmed in writing that all
archaeological licensing and technical review requirements have been satisfied.
Landscape/Views
Visual screening measures will be explored during detail design, in consultation with affected property owners.
MTO will continue to consult with the Highway of Heroes Tree Campaign during detail design to explore
opportunities for plantings that commemorate and honour Canada’s veterans and servicemen and
servicewomen.
PropertyImpacts to private property have been identified in association with the Preferred Plan. Negotiations with
impacted property owners will be carried out after Environmental Clearance has been obtained.
Air QualityAn Air Quality Assessment is being completed in accordance with Provincial guidelines to assess the potential
changes in local and regional air quality, and to determine if mitigation measures are required.
Noise
The potential changes in traffic noise associated with the Preferred Plan is currently being reviewed. A Noise
Assessment is being completed in accordance with Provincial guidelines to determine if measures are required
to mitigate potential increases in traffic noise.
Traffic Operations
Construction activities are expected to impact traffic operations. Advanced notification will be provided to
affected residents in advance of construction activities. Detour and Staging Plans will be finalized during detail
design. Detour Plans will be finalized in consultation with municipalities and emergency service providers.
In accordance with the Class Environmental Assessment process, environmental factors were considered as part of the evaluation process, and many of the
environmental concerns related to this project have been mitigated through the process by which the Preferred Plan was selected. A summary of the
environmental factors anticipated to be impacted by this project and the proposed mitigation measures are briefly described below. A detailed description of
potential impacts associated with this project and associated mitigation measures will be provided within the Transportation Environmental Study Report.
Potential Detours
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Potential Detours
Category Approximate Duration Typical Scenario
Overnight closures 12-18 hours Highway 401 bridge demolitions and
girder placements for new bridges
Short-term closures 1-30 days Interchange ramp closures
Long-term closures 1-4 months Municipal road bridge closures
The number of overnight closures and the duration of short-term and long-term closures
will be confirmed during Detail Design.
Overnight ClosuresPotential
Detours
Short-term ClosuresPotential
Detours
Long-term ClosuresPotential
Detours
Notification Strategy
PIC 2 Council Presentation
PIC 2 Notifications
MAC Meeting #2 April 15, 2020
Notice to Impacted Property Owners August 10, 2020
Online Impacted Property Owner Meetings August 24 – September 25, 2020
External Agency Mailing August 10, 2020
Stakeholder Mailing August 10, 2020
Mailing to Indigenous Communities August 10, 2020
Website updated with Notice August 13, 2020
Northumberland News August 13, 2020
Brighton Independent August 13, 2020
Township of Alnwick/Haldimand Council Meeting TBD
Northumberland County Council Meeting August 26, 2020 (9:30am)
Township of Cramahe Council Meeting August 18, 2020 (6:00pm)
Online Public Information Centre August 27, 2020
Comments requested by September 25, 2020
Notification
Strategy
Impacted Property OwnersNotification
Strategy
• Personal tailored letters
and property plan to all
potentially impacted
property owners
• Online property owner
meetings with significantly
impacted property owners
Project Schedule
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Project Milestone Dates
Key Milestone Date
Notice of Study Commencement April 26, 2018
MAC Meeting 1 May 16, 2019
Public Information Centre 1 (Alternatives) September 18, 2019
MAC Meeting 2 April 15, 2020
Notice of Public Information Centre 2 August 13, 2020
Public Information Centre 2 (Preferred Plan) August 27, 2020
TESR 30-day Public Review Period January 2021
Questions
PIC 2 Council Presentation
Top Related